Jess Wade sourced a BLP to Facebook. In July 2023.
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2023 3:13 am
I was a little surprised that it was a Wikipedia Administrator (Justlettersandnumbers) who called it out....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped ... dira_Raman
I was less surprised that this is where it ended. He didn't follow it up, didn't ask himself how it can possibly be that she can do something that irresponsible, that negligent, with over a thousand biographies and years of editing to her name. Didn't go look to see that this is actually a pattern. It is representative of her work.
Shout out to Hemiauchenia, who thinks I am crazy. Yeah, whatever.
Hat tip to Ritchie333 too, having his breakfast, hoping everyone had forgotten he once did and probably still does think Wade is Admin material.
The real puzzler, as always, is why Jake allows these sad little addicts to shit up perfectly good threads with their obvious attempts to distract people from the real issues. The Wikipedia criticism.
The Jess Wade problem is real, and ongoing.
They're not denying it. How can they? Name a single other editor with a comparable record who is getting away with using Facebook as a source on BLPs....
Narrow that down to Wikipedia editors with medals and continuing fawning profiles in the Guardian, and the list has only one entry.
JESS WADE.
Only a Wikipedia apologist would deny it. Perhaps that is what Tarantino's latest truffle hunt inadvertently proved. The only people left on Wikipediocracy, are the addicts and apologists. Hardly news of course.
Fuck them.
And fuck Jake too, for bizarrely thinking Jess comes across as "nice" (she is quite literally a mute on Wikipedia, an actual improvement on her past demeanor), and for daring to suggest it is in any way my fault that people are knowingly covering up how bad an editor Jess Wade really is.
Let's have it right. I am a fair man. I have my methods. I ALWAYS give people a fair opportunity to prove that approaching them politely, in the right way, having filled out the right forms and presented the right evidence, did not get the results that Wikipedia policy says I should have got.
I always give people that chance.
That is why I can then take such pleasure in GRINDING THEIR FACES INTO THE DIRT when they make the mistake of thinking they can treat me like some kind of dumb cunt who was born yesterday and can be shooed away like timid feline. My fangs are much bigger. I am nothing like Vigilant, that pathetic paper tiger. I have teeth because I bite. I bite because I can.
I am a nasty man because I like it, and it works. I like watching people like Ritchie333 suffer the consequences of their hubris. Their arrogance. Their rank stupidity.
I like knowing that he probably thinks he can insult me without consequences, courtesy of Jake and the Foundation. Vigilant made that mistake. Look at him now. Toothless. I did that. Where is the evidence Vigilant? Where's the blockbuster blog post that was going to lay out the biggest ever scandal in Wikipedia history? Did you just make it up? A simple request, and he was completely destroyed.
Will it be the same with Ritchie. Will he ever say what he really thinks about Wade's chances at RfA these days? Will he ever tell the obvious truth about her editing? Or will he just keep lying and blowing smoke up her ass? I hope he does, and I hope his fiance is the jealous type. Don't choke on your eggs, Ritchie. And maybe book a precautionary appointment with that therapist. You know how you get.
Yeah, I went there. I remember.
I go where Vigilant is afraid to go.
I do what Vigilant cannot do.
And he's been a whiny little bitch about it ever since.
Change is good, V. Try Try rediscover your lost reputation. Say something useful. Tell us what you think about a medal winning editor using Facebook as a source says about the fact Ritchie is seen as one of the better Wikipedia Administrators?
I have always been ahead of the game. Always out there in the deep, dark waters.
Does Cullen charge people $60 an hour to advise people not to source BLPs to Facebook? Does he DARE, with a medal winning editor like Wade setting the actually proven standard for what is and is not a spectacularly good editor whose biographies shall never be challenged lest ye be J'ACCUSED of sexizme in La Guardian?
You can skip that one V, that's a question for a person like Beeblebrox. Someone with actual responsibility over all these despicable maggots. We are so blessed to have him with us. Or you at least. Such privelage.
Go on Jake. Make him answer. For the good of all those confused by the inherent contradictions and downright lies that underpin Wikipedia governance. The outsiders. Those that do not know their ways.
What's that? He told you to go fuck yourself?
Ha ha ha.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped ... dira_Raman
I was less surprised that this is where it ended. He didn't follow it up, didn't ask himself how it can possibly be that she can do something that irresponsible, that negligent, with over a thousand biographies and years of editing to her name. Didn't go look to see that this is actually a pattern. It is representative of her work.
Shout out to Hemiauchenia, who thinks I am crazy. Yeah, whatever.
Hat tip to Ritchie333 too, having his breakfast, hoping everyone had forgotten he once did and probably still does think Wade is Admin material.
The real puzzler, as always, is why Jake allows these sad little addicts to shit up perfectly good threads with their obvious attempts to distract people from the real issues. The Wikipedia criticism.
The Jess Wade problem is real, and ongoing.
They're not denying it. How can they? Name a single other editor with a comparable record who is getting away with using Facebook as a source on BLPs....
Narrow that down to Wikipedia editors with medals and continuing fawning profiles in the Guardian, and the list has only one entry.
JESS WADE.
Only a Wikipedia apologist would deny it. Perhaps that is what Tarantino's latest truffle hunt inadvertently proved. The only people left on Wikipediocracy, are the addicts and apologists. Hardly news of course.
Fuck them.
And fuck Jake too, for bizarrely thinking Jess comes across as "nice" (she is quite literally a mute on Wikipedia, an actual improvement on her past demeanor), and for daring to suggest it is in any way my fault that people are knowingly covering up how bad an editor Jess Wade really is.
Let's have it right. I am a fair man. I have my methods. I ALWAYS give people a fair opportunity to prove that approaching them politely, in the right way, having filled out the right forms and presented the right evidence, did not get the results that Wikipedia policy says I should have got.
I always give people that chance.
That is why I can then take such pleasure in GRINDING THEIR FACES INTO THE DIRT when they make the mistake of thinking they can treat me like some kind of dumb cunt who was born yesterday and can be shooed away like timid feline. My fangs are much bigger. I am nothing like Vigilant, that pathetic paper tiger. I have teeth because I bite. I bite because I can.
I am a nasty man because I like it, and it works. I like watching people like Ritchie333 suffer the consequences of their hubris. Their arrogance. Their rank stupidity.
I like knowing that he probably thinks he can insult me without consequences, courtesy of Jake and the Foundation. Vigilant made that mistake. Look at him now. Toothless. I did that. Where is the evidence Vigilant? Where's the blockbuster blog post that was going to lay out the biggest ever scandal in Wikipedia history? Did you just make it up? A simple request, and he was completely destroyed.
Will it be the same with Ritchie. Will he ever say what he really thinks about Wade's chances at RfA these days? Will he ever tell the obvious truth about her editing? Or will he just keep lying and blowing smoke up her ass? I hope he does, and I hope his fiance is the jealous type. Don't choke on your eggs, Ritchie. And maybe book a precautionary appointment with that therapist. You know how you get.
Yeah, I went there. I remember.
I go where Vigilant is afraid to go.
I do what Vigilant cannot do.
And he's been a whiny little bitch about it ever since.
Change is good, V. Try Try rediscover your lost reputation. Say something useful. Tell us what you think about a medal winning editor using Facebook as a source says about the fact Ritchie is seen as one of the better Wikipedia Administrators?
I have always been ahead of the game. Always out there in the deep, dark waters.
Does Cullen charge people $60 an hour to advise people not to source BLPs to Facebook? Does he DARE, with a medal winning editor like Wade setting the actually proven standard for what is and is not a spectacularly good editor whose biographies shall never be challenged lest ye be J'ACCUSED of sexizme in La Guardian?
You can skip that one V, that's a question for a person like Beeblebrox. Someone with actual responsibility over all these despicable maggots. We are so blessed to have him with us. Or you at least. Such privelage.
Go on Jake. Make him answer. For the good of all those confused by the inherent contradictions and downright lies that underpin Wikipedia governance. The outsiders. Those that do not know their ways.
What's that? He told you to go fuck yourself?
Ha ha ha.